All right. Apologies to everybody. Sorry I'm late. Had the time mixed up. One more month at six after this. Um, so it is 6:12. Uh, and I'll call the July regular
meeting of the Sartell St. Steven School Board to order. Thank you to all the community members that are attending in person as well as online. We appreciate your interest and engagement in our school district. The expectation of our community is that all participants and attendees will conduct themselves professionally and with respect for
other members of our community. The first item on the agenda is the pledge of allegiance. >> Algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. Okay. Uh, next item. I'll look for a motion to approve the agenda. >> Second. >> Motion by Trisha, second by Emily. Any discussion? >> All right. All in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed.
Agenda is approved unanimously. Um, recognition of visitors and public forum typically comes now, but we have nobody signed up. So, we will move on to uh the consent agenda. Do we have a motion to approve the consent agenda items? >> So, move second. >> Motion by Jen, second by Chelsea. Any
questions? Okay. Um, all in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Any oppose? Consent agenda is passed unanimously. Uh, that gets us down to our report section. And the first report we have is
the uh Saber Star report by Sartell High School's new assistant principal, Don Gint. Welcome. >> All right. Good evening everyone. Um I'm here to present >> a star to Dana.
Um so while I say some nice things about you. >> Um so I had the privilege the last four years of working with Diana as her I was a spend supervisor. She was secretary, but prior to that, she was also the secretary at Pine Meadow Elementary
School. So, she has worked in the Sartell school district for 14 years and is now retiring. We are sad because when I reached out to some staff, they really had some great things to say about DM. So, I'd like to say that her reliability, her hard work,
her flexibility, and attention to detail made a lasting impact on everyone she worked with. It was a theme. Um, her kindness positive attitude and genuine care for others made everyone feel welcomed and valued. So, thank you for everything. You will be greatly missed
and we wish you the best in your Well, thank you. I appreciate it. >> Congratulations. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> All right. Uh, next report on the list is Dr. Revard's superintendent report. >> Good evening, members of the board. So,
just a few things to update the board on and the We do have some new administrative leadership that is starting as of July 1. So this is an exciting time as a former principal. I feel and recognize their excitement. So Robert Kaisenhoff is now leading at Oakidge Early Learning
Center. We're excited for Robert as he makes that transition into a leadership role after spending his first year at Riverview as an assistant principal. Uh Nick Peterson will be leading Sartell Middle School. uh he's already out there and working at the building and uh we're
excited for Nick. Nick's been an assistant principal here at the high school um for nearly a decade and we're we're grateful for his leadership and his willingness to stay on and help lead the middle school. Um as we look forward to summer construction progress, we are
seeing things happening at Riverview. We're we're excited about the HVAC implementation. Um I was able to update WJ over this past week and We're really hopeful that we'll have everything ready to go come September 7th 8th September
7th. Um as we bring our teachers, our kids, and everyone back into the building. Another recognition to be looking at again. We have another ACT perfect score from one of our students. Uh this is a remarkable accomplishment
when you think about it in itself. Um Henry Johnson was a perfect score for us on the ACT just in the last seven or eight months. And now Zach Wagenut is our second perfect score on the ACT. This continues just to show the
distinction of what happens here in Sel Steven School District and the amazing work not only of our teachers and our staff and those around these students but especially of their families and all the things that happen for those two young people as they sat down to take a
test pretty uh have been spending the last two or three weeks working on the implementation of our cell phone policy and working with uh the administration at the high school. Uh that's exciting to take a policy and put it into practice. So we're looking forward to
really getting the word out to our families and to our students and how implementation of that will work as we bring our students back into their building come early in September. And then lastly, a little earlier this evening, I was with the Sartell St.
Steven Education Foundation. Uh wanted to express my appreciation for that group. They they show up every two months excited to see what they can do for our students and looking for grant opportunities for our teachers. So was just another pleasurable afternoon to
spend time with that group as we look forward to September coming around. That's your super this month. Any questions? Uh, I guess I would have one. Um, I know we'll probably talk more about the, uh, cell phone implementation plan when we
talk about handbooks later, but you mentioned getting word out to the community about the new policy at the high school. What can you share with us about what that will look like? The plan, the communication plan will start next as early as next week. Uh, Principal Ker will be sending out some
information then. We have a social media campaign that we're going to be utilizing both Facebook and some other areas. and looking at ways of making sure that we have weekly touch points starting in August. So our first touch point will be here in July and then weekly touch points with our families and our
students every week during the month of August. So they have an opportunity to hearing about it, thinking about it, working with their family. Any other questions for Dr. Revard? All right. Thank you very much. All
right, last report is the schoolboard committee reports. So, uh, I guess I get to start off with Benton Sterns, which is not good news that the facility opportunity I mentioned last month is no longer an opportunity. So, unfortunately, the
owner backed out of that potential agreement, and that means we're kind of back to square one. And Benton Sterns has no uh they always do this. They don't have a regular board meeting in July. So there is no board meeting until the third week of August, which is where
I suppose we'll get a further update on where the search might go from here. But uh with that said, career and tech ed looks like a future meeting on October 28th. Okay. Communications and Technology
Committee, future meeting on that same date, October 28th. And Community Education Advisory Committee has a future meeting August 3rd. So, it's coming up somewhat soon. Um, not to be spoiler, but a lot of these
are future meetings, so we're not going to have many reports. Finance and Personnel, uh, is going to meet on September 18th. Our next city and district ad hoc committee meeting that Jen and I will attend is on August 20th. Um legislative network and schools
advocating for fair funding I don't think has had a meeting since they do one summer meeting typically but I don't remember seeing even notice of that this year. So >> the executive meeting was last month. >> Okay. Yeah. And most of their meetings
are during the school year. So that's not a big surprise. Um, so same with uh Kaser, comprehensive achievement and civic readiness. No meetings until the school year. Um, Minnesota State High School League. Uh, I did actually have a
meeting last week. Uh, this is the one quarterly meeting that's in Sartell. We met at Sartell High School um on Wednesday of last week. and I can give a brief update. Although most of the discussion was just
administration of the section tournaments and rehashing um those we didn't have any rules that were in front of the committee to consider. Um generally as far as section tournaments go, I think I mentioned this last time we had a meeting is that doing
for instance section final games at the high seed versus a neutral site has worked really well. And we saw that again um with the tournaments in the spring that did that um one of which we were a beneficiary of. We hosted the softball section title here that Sartell
was involved in. So um attendance seems to be up in those types of games. So if I remember right overall across all the spring section tournaments our revenue was up a little bit. So that's a reflection of that recent change being a
positive one. The update that we got from uh the state board, the high school association board was very similar to an update that I think Jen you had given not too long ago. The base the main
issues there were um girls wrestling duels getting emerging status uh flag football being tabled. They were seeking emerging status also I believe. Uh and then the ongoing difficulties scheduling boys and girls basketball state
tournaments uh and working around the University of Minnesota schedule on that one. So um just another reminder, this coming school year, all of the section classifications are the same as
this past school year, but you will probably hear come fall, which is earlier than normal, what they will be for the following school year. So there might be some confusion out there that when we come to this fall and start hearing about changing section classifications that won't kick in until
the school year of 2728. So that's about all I have to report on that one. We set future meeting dates which is uh like I said quarterly. Three of them are in Alexandria. The one's during the school year and then the
summer meeting is always at high school. Did you have a league meeting? Okay. >> Um, uh, negotiations. Um, Jen and I and Dr. Revard sat down and successfully negotiated his, uh, contract, which would begin July one of next year.
Another three-year contract that's up for vote later today. And then we have future negotiation meetings, um, Wednesday of this week uh, for both the par professionals and the clerical groups. Uh facilities committee will meet August
25th. Policy committee looks like you meet August 6th, which is right before the work session. Um Sartell senior connection, did you have a meeting in July? >> We did not. August 3rd. >> All right. Monday, August 3rd is the next one of those. And then resource
training and solutions. I have June 17th written down. >> I had a meeting or we had a meeting in June. Uh the big takeaway with that is we did um the CEO's review um looking at potentially making some changes there
um at the review process, I'm sorry, not the CEO. Um and then we also did our retreat or not our retreat, our uh conference up in Duth a couple weeks ago. um which was interesting because the only thing I have to compare it to
is MSBA and it's just very different. Um we did have a couple keynote speakers. Um they did a good job. Um otherwise it was a couple sessions that you listened to. there was
a demographer there talking about low birth rates um and the population movement um and that was really about it and then we don't have a meeting in July.
>> Thank you. >> All right, that's the end of our committee reports which means we're at the end of our report section. Uh moving on to action items. Uh the first one is to approve the resolution accepting
donations. Is there a motion? >> Second. >> Motion by Jen, second by Emily. It just so happens that Jen is up for reading that. >> So I apologize if I butcher anyone's name, but thank you all for the donations. um resource training and
solutions donated to Sartell High School in the amount of $2,84346 for our back CTE grant. Um, Township of Lace donated to the community education um, in the amount of 3,000 for summer recreation
sponsorships. Annne Hersburgger donated to the district a violin in the value of $100 for our music programs. Chris Mahold donated to the district a trombone for our music programs.
Katie Bus Busy donated to the district a trumpet in the value of $900 to our music programs. We have an anonymous donor who donated to our district violins, flutes, clarinets, drum for our music program. And then Sartell St.
Steven Education Foundation donated to the district in the amount of 27,760.98 um for grant reimbursements and then Granite City chapter of Delta Waterfall donated to Sartell High School in the
amount of $750 for the Clay Target team. So, thank you very much for all those donations. >> Okay. Uh, all in favor of approving the resolution say I. >> I. >> I. >> Any opposed?
Resolution passes unanimously. Um, next action item uh to improve approve the employee handbook. Is there a motion? >> A motion. >> Second. >> Motion by Jen. Second by Emily. Any discussion that we want to have on
this? The handbook was attached to our materials. administration will entertain any questions you may have. Chris is here to join us. Have some questions. >> I guess just one question. Were there any suggestions that came in for
grammatical that needed to anything substantive or Okay. >> Okay. If there's no other questions on the employee handbook, I'll ask for votes. All in favor of approving the employee handbook say I.
>> I. >> I. >> Any opposed. All right. Passes unanimously. Next, I'll look for a motion to approve the 2026 to 27 school year handbooks. >> Some second.
>> Motion by Jen, second by Chelsea. Again, all the handbooks were included with a list of a summary of changes. Um, Dr. Revard, we can open up to questions
from board members or unless there's anything you wanted to say first of all. Okay. >> No, I would just say just for the board and public's information, the the handbooks are worked on and started on probably in May. Our principles come together in this room and go through all the handbooks word by word. Uh, we spend
trying to make sure that we have some alignment especially as we look at our elementary and our secondary schools so that we don't have that we look for alignment to ensure that our three elementary schools have very similar language and we look for alignment for our secondary schools at the middle and high school so that
there's similar language there recognizing that there's still some developmental differences um in each of those five buildings so they do spend time together trying to do that but besides that there's always some minor tweaks that happen every the handbooks and so they represented the
administration. >> The only question that I had was kind of across the board in each building the personal electronic communication devices
is different for every building. Also seems to the way that they're written have a different level of restriction where especially with the changes to the policy. I guess I just didn't understand why it wasn't just a uniform taking of our language from the policy
essentially because it's going to be bell to bell at every building. But like in Oakidge there's u not even really a restriction on them in the way that it's worded. um it's just communication
devices must be regulated to ensure that devices do not disrupt or interfere with the education process or school operations so on and so forth. So it's got completely different language for the youngest grades when you go on each school and they they do all word it differently. So I don't know if that's
something that we could just make uniform because really the rule is the same at every building, right? >> Uh we we certainly could try to make them uniform in terms of the language at every building. I challenge that we encounter is ensuring that for at
Oakidge we don't have children coming in with cell phones. So the the challenge there is they're always put away or they don't even make it to the building because our four, five, and six don't have cell phones. So we just have that recognition of developmental age wise we just don't see that being a concern. So
listed out necessarily in the handbook that way with the same level of strict adherence you might see in some of the other buildings. But then when you River especially, you start seeing some language that is more prescribed about what should happen when the cell phones
come in because we do see 8 9 10 11 year olds coming in. >> Oh yeah, >> that's that's the reason is probably more of just need of what we've seen over the years, but we certainly could try and make it even more prescribed. >> The language the language from the other
buildings is truly a reflection of how those building administrations see how Yeah, I guess just because it's in here, if it's not something that we're seeing in Oakidge, does it need to be in here at all then?
>> I know the age is getting under like I guarantee there's probably some students that might have some sort of device at high metal, you know, a lodge or even a potentially a phone, even though it gets younger and younger every year. So, I don't know if we want to I understand the Oak Ridge thing, but then if we're
going to have it in there as a section, do we want to just have it be somewhat uniform matching our policy? Because right now, it's essentially just saying if they would happen to bring something in, there's not really a this isn't
really a statement that's telling me what to do with it. It's just that they must be regulated to ensure that such devices do not disrupt or interfere with the education process. What does that mean? >> For a 5-year-old, we be taking those away, >> right? But that's where I just mean like
don't you know, do we want to just have it be more straightforward if we're going to have the section at all >> and probably the same thing with Pine Meadow because I think it be similar for Pine Meadow too >> and I think it's probably because of those administrators that
we can that we don't want to see. >> Well, I guess on that note, I don't know that it's really going to be the cell phone. I think it should be worded the same to your point, but I think the thing you're going to see is the gizmo
watches and the Apple watches that parents use to like track their kids and do those kinds of things. You do have it on page 15 though. It says personal electronic communication devices such as cell phones. and smart watches are not to be used by students during school hours. It's just not in the same spot. >> Yeah.
>> Which also totally confused me, but I mean Yeah. So maybe that could essentially just be the statement >> for bridge and just move it underneath if we're going to have the technology section.
>> That was on page 15 of the handbook I think of. >> Yes. I think. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's under telephones. >> Yeah. >> It's also yellow.
>> Okay. >> So, would the recommendation from the board be to move that statement to above on the area? >> Well, yeah, because it's just in two places. If we're going to have an entire section for personal electronic communication devices, which watches or
gizmo, you know, any of the things listed would fall under. We just want to move that statement underneath that section. And we could do that in Pine Meadow, too. >> Makes sense to me. >> That was really all I had for any of them, though. Honestly,
I have a question. Wait, Marilyn spoke before the meeting. I'm doing it on paper. She's doing electronic page 15 of the >> parking on page 15. Put this that same thing below just copy
and past the personal into the 18 I think right. >> Yeah. I think my biggest thing for like Oakidge, Pine Meadow, and Riverview is we removed so much language and we're
replacing it with a hyperlink. And as much as I appreciate a hyperlink and not having all like having the handbooks get really long and lengthy, I do feel a lot of that information was very important for parents to like read over and read through as a reminder. And I understand that they're in this the code of
conduct. I guess I kind of would prefer that it just be in the handbook then the school bus. >> Yeah. >> Violations. >> I don't know that we have to have all of it. Could there be like you know first offense this is what happens and then like to see more you could go here but like just actually have some of that
information continue to be contained in the document because we require all of our parents to read them >> and sign off that they've read them. the handbook that is not the code of conduct. Yes. Right. I >> mean, nobody's going to sit there and
force them to touch the hyperlink. And that's I mean I I if I'm the only one that feels that way, that's fine. I just that was like one of my concerns for those younger ones. >> I did have the same thought, but I was kind of like ah I can see both sides of the coin on that one. So I just became indifferent on it. That was my first
thought though is like parents are going to be far more likely to to seek out the handbook than they will the code of conduct and then once they get to the handbook are they then going to go search the code of conduct to get the answer to the question about school bus
violations. But then I thought, well, okay, are they really going to be if their child did something on a bus that is in, you know, violation and they're going to have a consequence, are they going to seek out the hand before the code of conduct either way or are they just going to reach out to the administrator and have a conversation
with them if they don't agree or want to, you know, talk through the process? Probably that's the more likely approach. So that's where I became indifferent on it, I guess. But I did have the same thought initially. I think for me the reason I feel that way is I feel like so many people have come up to
me specifically and said that they don't appreciate all the clicks like whether it be our emails that we get every week that I have to go click on. Oh great I have to go click on me like if I want the information I just want to come to my email. So on the same level of thing I just worry
transparency wise I feel like it'd be better to just have it in the document. I also understand you want to like update the code of conduct. >> Are you specifically you're just talking about the consequence section of it or are you talking also under the criminal notice discipline record?
>> I would say probably more of like your bus like the more common >> the consequence part. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. I thought that criminal conduct, the notice, all of that I thought was fine if that >> okay >> wasn't living in there. It was just the first offense, second offense. But
again, I'm not passionate one way or the other here. So, whatever the majority >> I would be fine leaving the consequences listed out. I think that's the one area that parents are going to seek the information and want the information quicker.
I I do get from like a policy govern not policy a a document governance perspective if having the same language in multiple places puts you at a greater risk for having discrepancies within that language if it's in multiple places versus if you're
linking to a document where it's supposed to live >> of that being less maintenance. But I also understand the point of wanting to make sure since we don't have parents sign up specifically on the code of ethics even though it's linked in the
handbooks of wanting to make sure that they're seeing that information. >> Well, and this would be like an after thought to a consequence probably being applied. They would then be going backwards and looking to see, well, what
did my handbook say? But is that going to change the situation at all? And if they were really that passionate about trying to find out if the consequence given was deserved or was in line with the handbook or the code of conduct, they would go as far as probably clicking on
the hyperlink, I would think then. But it's going to be nobody's going to be looking at these offenses on the front side and saying, "Well, if you get in trouble, here's first, second, and third. What's going to happen is it's going to be, well, you got in trouble. Is your punishment aligned with what's
in the handbook or what's in the code of conduct? So, I would say I'm fine taking it out too because I agree, Chelsea, we do kind of leave ourselves open to there being a discrepancy and then that becomes a bigger issue.
>> Was there a reason for removing the language other than just to avoid redundancy? >> From my perspective formally as a principal and amilies when challenges are mistakes children. My hope is always to have most consequences or any challenge or
anything that we would be doing with students to be listed out in the code of conduct knowing that that's a document that our assistant principles especially principles and read. Um and I say that at the same time knowing
that this year the handbook I'm appreciative of the cell phone changes included in the handbook and we're calling attention to that. But even after a year or two I would to moving anything related to consequences into the code of conduct only
the handbook to be something more guidance about how you're going through your school day and if there's concerns that happen because you made a mistake during your school day that we have referring to the code of conduct when they're having those conversations with parents
but again I'm open to whatever the will of the board the challenge becomes do we want to look at handbooks just being part one and then part two being the code of conduct because by approving the handbooks you are approving the code of conduct
and by that I mean I can just make all this one document the code of conduct document and we just recognize that for some students when they make a mistake anywhere could be a level one all the
way up to a level five but we look at developmental stages make decisions and those decisions are made by our administrators. We certainly just do
a way to simplify this in the future. >> Maybe that's my hiccup is we have some consequences listed in some areas that we don't and if we're going to be moving towards that in the future, maybe the compromise would be to leave some of the bus this year and then do the full
switch next year. So everything is in I don't know. We'll see if you're talking about that was something that came to my it will not prevent me from approving. I don't know strong feelings one way or the other but I understand Dr. Revard's explanation and it makes sense that it
was a thoughtful deletion from the handbook. Um, and if that's the direction we want to eventually go with everything. Let's see. I I see leaving the cell phone stuff in, like you said, that's something to call attention to early on while we're implementing a new policy at
the high school, but I don't know that I need to see the consequences for busy infractions put back in. That's just my personal thought. Like I said, I don't have a strong feeling. Okay. from the board.
>> Yeah, I think leave the strike out. Just remove, right? Are we all okay with that? >> I'm okay with that. >> Yeah. >> Further discussion. >> Yeah. Yeah. We can do that next year. >> Yeah. We can have a discussion about her, >> right? We can have a discussion about
that next year. Yeah. >> Um the next thing I noticed at those younger levels, and I think this was just for review specific, if you go to page 19, and I did talk to Dr. Mark about this, but um there's a spelling mistake on
um the technology personal electronic communication device. Um number five, they did a double P. But then I also I told you I would do this like could I have an example of why we would have it written this way that says are not permitted during the school day unless a
staff member has granted special permission for a specific purpose. But I couldn't think of any reason that you might be giving that specific purposes like to me that would be living and breathing with >> Will you tell me where you're looking? >> It's on page >> you said page 19 of Riverview >> of Riverview's handbook
>> under the technology device number five. >> So if you're on the PDF I'm at page 164. >> Okay. You said number five. >> Yes. >> Use of devices are not permitted during the school day unless a staff member has
granted special permission for a specific purpose. And the question is what is an example of that specific purpose. >> Okay. And for me where I I would like to see that rewarded especially after talking that it shouldn't say staff member it should say administrator and
that would be calling attention to our students who may or may not be on a health plan or >> so using the device as a medical monitoring >> right >> device. Okay. >> But I guess don't we already have that called on the policy? Do we need to call that out?
This is the first year and that's one of the reasons why I think they were building. >> Sure. And I think where you do see a view where there's more language that's being utilized is because we recognize that it's going to be more of a challenge as we look at our third and fifth graders who often times are going
to have >> so change the words a staff member to an administrator. >> Building administrator. >> A building administrator. Okay. Any other questions on the three youngest schools? We've been talking about those mainly bridge, P
Meadow, Riverview. Oh. Uh, just because I brought it up before, is there any way to keep the line moving at Pine Meadow? Like putting in there something like if you're going to help your child get out of the car, please park in a parking
spot. >> I don't know. That's what I'm asking. >> Do we have anything in there? >> You want it added because it doesn't exist? >> Yeah. What I what sparked it was seeing the middle school bus route and I know
that we have like the drop or like the drop off routes, but it's >> page six. >> Is it on page six? Thank you. >> And they give the map. You just want there to be a special call out to >> like a reminder that the line needs to
keep mov because it there are times it's backed up down the road. It does say if you need to walk your child into the building, please park in a designated parking spot. >> Can we add if you need to help get your child unbuckled because it's not even people that are like walking their child in, although
some are. It's also like just getting out of the car and I understand that we have students that need that, but the line also needs to keep moving. >> Is there >> So, I'm looking at a
small B. You'd like to add something I'm assuming is somewhere in there. >> I think it's under C >> or updating C that just says if you need to walk you need to help your child out of the car. >> You need to walk your child to the building or help your child out of the
car. Just something >> I think that give your child one more hug. You can >> you can Yeah. Park. I mean, >> yeah, >> I just want it bolded and underlined and highlighted. >> Well, I mean, it's it is a courtesy thing. Plus, it also is to keep the
traffic moving on that road as well. >> So, I have two questions. One to Dr. Revard first. Is there any feedback from administration or the staff that does the monitoring of drop off? >> I think >> at Pine Meadow that that's an issue.
>> Absolutely. >> Okay. We certainly know it's the city knows it's an issue and we all know that it's a challenging area trying to bring kids in and the intersection as you enter back on to find struggling to. I think
what you see is a proposal that comes from building administration that's probably looking at using language that doesn't go to what's the word I'm looking for? Uh is not too pushy. Maybe it is the only way I can put it. Um so I'm more than
willing to take a look at how you'd like to word something to that effect. Um, but give me context again, please. >> Keep the traffic moving. >> Genuinely, if any parents like getting out of their in that line to like unbuckle their child and like help them
with the door and the like >> and >> and that's not the time and place like if you have to do that to your point like and walk them to the curb so that the traffic can keep flowing. It's not it's a safety thing too like >> Yeah. Yeah, because you can have cars that are then going to try to pull
around and then park. But now, are we going to end up with people not paying attention? Because there are times I actually see parents that'll kind of start pulling like slowly creeping, but they're staring to see if their child has made it into the building and it's like, well,
at this point, they're on the sidewalk and we need to keep going. So, how about a and I was going to ask that was going to be my second question is can we make that just a bit more general like >> for instance if you need to walk your child into the building or otherwise
exit your vehicle to assist a child. >> Well, >> please park in a designated parking spot. Just I I think the whole idea is don't get out of your car if you're not in a spot. >> Maybe you could just say that if you need to exit your vehicle for any reason. Yeah, that's kind of >> if you need to exit your vehicle for any
reason to help your child, please park. >> I think what Chelsea is saying is don't even say it to help your child for any reason. >> Yep. Got it. >> I just think that people might find a loophole in that statement and think, well, I'm exiting, but I'm exiting my
car, not for myself. I'm exiting to get my child out. So, they might find a loophole. >> That's still a reason for any reason. >> I still think it's going to get exploited, but we can try. Well, I'm sure it will, but I mean, or is there a way to implement like what Riverview
does? You have one person towards the front of the line, you have another person towards the back of the line, and they're literally like, "Let's go. We're going to usher you through just as a reminder because at Pine Meadow, I see our staff on the sidewalk and I it's to
make sure that everyone is there. But is there a way to keep the traffic moving like it does at Riverview? Um then my question maybe that has been talked about with my meadow administration is the way it's written. The only way a kid is crossing the
traffic of the drop off line is with a parent and now we're going to put a system in where if they have to be unbuckled from their car seat and then they're sent on their way by themselves, we're crossing them in front of live traffic. >> No, their parent should have to get out of their and walk them across. Okay. Well, then you need to put that in here
also. >> However, we want to word smmith it, but >> well, you would have to say something along the lines of >> assist your child in getting out of the vehicle. You must park in a designated spot and walk them into the building.
>> Walk them to the sidewalk, >> right? >> Or walk. >> So, it's basically going to be a whole new sentence because you keep the current one. If you need to walk your child into the building, park in a spot. And then you'd have to add a new one that says if your child needs assistance
that requires you to exit your vehicle, you need to park in a spot and then walk them through traffic into you. You need two though. I think you could do it. One, just say your child across the need to walk your child in the building
or assist your child out of the car or get out of your vehicle for any reason, please park and walk your child to the curb safely. >> Sure. >> Yeah. Personally, that makes sense to me. I'd like to rely more on
administration and what their recommendations are in making the change to a system that we've all got experience being in the lines, but we don't have the experience being there running the show on the curb. So,
I feel more comfortable getting feedback about whether that change should or should not be implemented. I would be curious how that would negatively impact staff, I guess, with parking and with parents parking and walking to the sidewalk. I I don't know what would change for them in that process. It's going to be the parents
that are going to have the the struggle with that because now they have to take that extra time. But staff wise, I think the process is the same. You're going to be given a child on the sidewalk where the parents going to walk them all the way to the building, but their, you know, their job in that
moment isn't changing. Well, and I haven't dropped off at Pine Meadow in many years, but just brainstorming, one possibility would be that if you're forcing more people to park in spots, you might run out of spots where now the jam up is not
in the curb line, it's people waiting to get into a parking spot and blocking traffic while they wait. So, who knows? That might not be an issue, but I don't I don't have that information. I'm not there dayto day. So, >> true. That's that's a question I would have I don't think need to be considered
amongst administration. >> I think what I believe I'm hearing is that parent needs to assist their child that involves the parent exiting the vehicle parking spot. in the board.
>> I mean, it's a complaint for me, but it's a complaint that I get from parents all the time at that school, too. So, >> we certainly can put it in the handbook, see how it works out in terms of a procedure for this school year. And if we have concerns about parking spots or people leaving parking spots back into
the line, we'll probably discuss that. Great. We can cut it. U my preference I guess would be not to make the change and get or make the change um
contingent on building administration there agreeing that it's a workable solution. I I wouldn't want to put in the handbook and then have building administration say for some for whatever reason maybe I'm not thinking of no I we've thought of that but it won't work because of X
reason I wouldn't want to force that on them but I don't is a way could we just approve that one change later on the handbook now and >> time I don't feel like we're asking them to change anything we're just asking them to actually say it black and white
if you're not if you're not going to drop your child in the park then you're actually We're just asking is that >> you're making a recommendation. >> Well, I mean, yes, but like we want you to be using more black and white language, but I don't think we're asking them to change the procedure that they're actually doing right now. Like
what you're supposed to be doing. I mean, my child just got done at Pine Meadow. Like, if I want to drop them off and I want to to help them get off my car, I parked. If I was willing to let him exit the vehicle by himself, I went through the drive-through line. Like, we're not asking them to change the
procedure of the like clarify in the handbook to say like if you are going to help your child out and you're getting out of your vehicle, please don't use the drop off, >> right? >> Because right now it says I want to clarify because the way Matt, sorry you were talking made me feel like we were
trying to change the procedure and I don't believe that's what >> No, because the procedure is not any different. It's just the fact that if when you get two three cars that are doing that, you've now delayed drop off >> that much more.
>> Probably the sentiment of the statement originally. Like if you are not just pulling up and letting your child out, >> this is not the line for you. I think we're just saying cl make it more clear. Just give it more clarity on what we mean by that. And
Yeah, I must have misunderstood. But I don't know. I I do see how you could read this and think unless I'm walking my child through the doors into the building >> 100%. Which is >> I can say along the curb. >> Yeah. >> Which
that's the Okay. Anyway, >> but I think that the sentiment behind that statement was >> like if you're stopping and getting out of your vehicle, it's essentially the same thing. You're you're holding up the entire line. So if you're stopping, you get out of your vehicle, you can't park. >> Well, I believe the rule of thumb is
they don't want anyone parking in any of those fire lanes ever. Like even if you're picking your child up for a dentist appointment, you're not you're supposed to park in the parking lot. >> So I do think it would be beneficial for that to be very clear. I'm not clear. >> Just what I was going to ask.
>> All the cars that I have no boots, but that's >> how you had it I think how you had it written of if you're either walking your child in or you're assisting your child in and out of the vehicle, please park in a designated spot and then bring them
to the curb. listed right now. I added a letter under C >> calling out well we got one idea that you going to walk your child in because you wanted to go and visit with the principal for sure >> that you're walking your child you're
not going to park on fire lane um especially during dismissal time drop off time but the second part is that if you need to assist your child so I know for those families who feel like they have to getting buckled and things like that that we're asking them to go park
to do that and they walk their child across the line holding one's hand. >> Correct. And so those are two different to me those are two different things that the board is asking different >> yeah that's fine >> I would agree with how you had it set
out um can you read the the way you have >> Sure I will take any suggestions I just had a parent if parent needs if a parent needs to assist your child parent needs to assist your child that involves parent exiting their vehicles
That's a bigger piece to aid them. Please park in a designated parking spot, not along the looks like letter C, but it has the parent involves a parent.
>> It's a parent/guardian. >> Yeah. >> Um C says if you need to say And I'm personally not comfortable having letter D without it specifying that they need to walk the child up to
the curb. >> No, I'm done. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, I agree. I don't want kids just being >> Please park in a designated parking spot and walk your child to sidewalk. Yep. That's
that's Dr. Riverard. That's the will of the board. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Please. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Middle school. >> Got it. >> Sure. Yep. Unless there's anything else for the younger schools, we can move on to SMS handbook.
Got to find my way there. I didn't have anything in middle school. I don't know what you guys said. Are we talking about either or just middle school? >> Um, >> either or is fine. >> So,
page eight, we talk about attendance. >> You're in middle school. >> No, high school. Sorry. >> Okay. >> Um, let me find it. But that section on the bottom. Attendance procedure.
>> What? >> Sorry, this was also another conversation that I had with Dr. But maybe maybe it was on page. But we talk about a written or verbal. >> Basically, what I'm saying is I think we
said we accept they were saying like you have to have a signed statement or a call for leaving the building and I did ask Dr. Bar to update that to also say that we would accept our emails and then obviously we go through the whole process of being able to go through Skyward. I do think it should be written out saying like not only can you make a
set aside statement, make a phone call, but you can also send us an email and you can use our >> Skyward is referring to page eight under your page number. >> Yes. Oh, so you just wanted to also say must
send a signed statement, call the office stating the date or enter into Skyward >> the reason and time of dismissal >> or send an email or enter into Skyward. >> Okay. >> Yeah, if that's current practice, that makes sense.
And then I also did ask about saver time in the absences and tardies counting towards our truency. Um, currently we talked about it, but like saver time has had some glitches and some issues with attendance. And although I very
much love the idea of saber time and I'm like a huge supporter of it, like using that towards attruency is something that I'm just not very comfortable with with at least what I experienced last year when we were taking attendance because there was multiple times where my own child was marked absent and was in the
building, but he had been pulled by a teacher to work on maybe it was a math problem or missing tests and the other teacher wasn't notified. like until we can fix that all maybe it is already fixed like I just have a really hard time agreeing that that should be included in our truency and yet I also
understand that we have to because otherwise we can't count it towards our hours and all those things so I just >> I share the same sentiment having experience >> but that's not called out under tr specifically in the handbook correct like saber type >> I think you just brought it to my brain
and I just wanted clarification >> so that's more I mean, how the handbook has truency written out, it's fine. It's just procedurally when it comes to saber time, there just needs to be a glitch addressed in how that is tallied at the
high school or how they're marked absent or not absent from that. >> Yeah, I see saber time referenced under student responsibilities, >> right? But they just students have the responsibility to regularly attend classes including saber advisory and
saber time, >> right? But I think some of it at least from my experience was there was a change that was made and that communication happens before or at 10:00 and anything after 10:00 is where you're
supposed to go. And if they're not checking that, but they go to where they thought they needed to be, then they're counted as absent. even though they are in that. >> Yeah, I had the same thing happen a couple times. So, >> so that's an internal I'm sure that's something that's already being worked
on. >> Is there a change we would need to make to the handbook language on that or just >> make a note of it and >> work with administration? Okay. Building enters was the next thing I I thought it read
And I can go more detail but Mike maybe you just want to do remember it was number four under lockers I told you I thought it was the payment plan and then you would come up with the solution. So the if you go to locker expectations
bottom bottom of page 11 number four just the idea that participation graduation center was held until all obligations are met or a payment plan with the school district. It's it's a sentence that we just it doesn't read
very well even after so many of us have gone through this. So I think at this time we're looking to change that view or payment plan. the on the high school one. So with electronic devices um
>> sorry um page 12 >> wondering if like so in where we talked about where like we the watches were specifically mentioned like I know in the policy it's specifically
calls out like watches, airpods, like some of that stuff. If for clarity it might be helpful to add like I know we could say cell phones and other electronic devices and give a description that matches the policy of what we mean by devices but in the
policy then like we also list out some of those and just with this being a change this year at the high school if if it would be helpful to be as clear as giving additional examples like smartwatches or AirPods so
It's like crystal clear. >> Yeah. I mean, I think I get what you're saying. Just so that it doesn't become a point of contention. Nobody can claim that they don't know what devices connect wirelessly to a cell phone, the internet, a cellular, a Wi-Fi network,
or directly connects to another similar device. Like AirPods clearly direct connect to a similar device. watches clearly connect to a similar device, but would somebody, if they were really trying to make a case for
themselves, argue, well, you didn't say AirPods or you didn't say this? I think we'd be able to very clearly say we said anything that connects to your device. So, I think that that would be a moot point, >> but I get what you're saying. >> Yeah. in the policy also did like more
clearly call out some of these things if >> and again I I agree I agree that the language is there fully covers those things. Could you just throw some examples but not limited to >> in parenthesis but >> I would just cut and paste
the second sentence of the definition in the policy definition of personal electronic communication device because we already have the first sentence means any personal device capable of connecting wirelessly to a cell phone internet cell or Wi-Fi network etc. Add the second sentence. Personal electronic communication devices may include cell
phones, wearable devices such as smartwatches. >> Yeah, >> phones, earbuds, etc., etc. >> So, you just >> Yeah, I'm fine with that. >> Just copy and paste the second >> Yeah.
>> You put it right at the end of that first paragraph in the handbook. Everybody good with that one? >> The last sentence in that. >> Yeah. The one you're I I'm looking at the same one you are. You're highlighting it right now. So, >> did anybody have anything else for Well,
I guess the middle school or the high school. I was just waiting for them. Oh. make sure that >> my the last thing I had was the the misuse and basically the consequences are very different at the
high school that they are at the other buildings and obviously I get it >> you're still on tech devices to be clear. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. Um, but I guess I have a really hard time, I guess, looking at this from a perspective that I did not vote to approve this policy. But yet,
I'm still really trying to be supportive and like follow the will of the board. But why I mean, if we're saying that the first offense at the middle school, the student will receive their phone or personal track device back to them, why can that not be the same at the high
school level? Um, I know that I don't get to do that. It's not my job, but it's just like I heard you tonight say that we're trying to make them as similar and you know like consistent as possible. And to me that's very inconsistent that
um that that's happening. And I think also like for those 40 plus% of our parents and families and just constituents in general that didn't say that they wanted this to move forward. I'm a little worried that that that
student won't be able to get their device back for them after their first defense themselves and a parent will have to go. I have no other issues with like having um detention or having to sign an like a device plan. I just that would be my biggest
>> just the first offense is what you're >> fine with offense two and three. >> Yep. >> I guess I'm not opposed to the first offense having it returned to the student. But again, it's not really our choice.
That's why I just I'll give you back information. >> Thank you. I was just about to ask before you go any obviously with a new board policy coming into play, putting together procedures and how we're going to respond to those areas is is always going to be a challenge because there'll be multiple
perspectives. Uh the perspective of the first offense, second offense, and third offense is the perspective taken from building administration and the building leadership team which also involves teachers who are on the ground. This was their recommendation. They wanted to
implement policy. >> Can I ask a question? And and I don't know if this is part of what we didn't anything but well two things. The middle school has had this policy in place for a couple years now. So there's more
familiarity with it. understand it. Students understand it pretty well. Now, at the high school, this will be new. Um, and I think that when we went to a couple of the presentations at MSBA, the offenses or the the consequences at
the first offense were immediately to be returned to the parent guardian only because it was a way of getting the parents to understand that we're taking this seriously as well. So if the parent has to make a trip to the school to get the phone back at the end of the day, they have buy in into this as well
because now they're responsible for picking up their child's phone. And some of them chose not to just as an additional consequence. They leave the phone there for a couple days longer just because. But it was a way to have parents buy in and parents involvement that this is a policy that's in place
for a reason. we are enforcing it and if your student isn't following it, you're going to be looped into the process. So, I don't know if that weighed into anything with the planning of the consequences, but I do know that was part of what I think it was Still Water
had talked about on why that was part of their first offense is having the parent pick up for that reason. >> My response is probably similar to what I think what you have when you look at these responses is that you don't have a
superintendent these responses. This is my my perspective on some of these. Of course, a little bit of the finality, but when they involved our teachers who are on the ground, this was their recommendation that came forward that
they didn't they didn't see this being too extreme or too too easy for students to not have a consequence thing. I'm sure when they were sitting down in a room, they also had multiple perspectives on what they
thought would be, well, we're going too far or this isn't far enough. So, I think when they came and brought this forward from Kler, I looked at it. I got some immediate responses, too. But I think that's where we're coming back. I'm coming back to my response to what
you're bringing up is that this is what they're hoping to see happen. If we're going to deviate from that, the board has every opportunity to do that as they're approving. I don't yeah I guess I don't have a desire necessarily to deviate from it. I
also think that this will be one of the larger policy changes that have happened and everybody's involvement in it is greatly appreciated. So I feel like it would be kind of unfair for us to come in and say hey you know we don't agree with this because this can all change.
This can be fluid too if it's not working. So, I I think that we should probably just respect the work that's been done up to this point by everybody involved and say, "Let's go with this." And if there really does need to be a pivot, we can always pivot.
>> So, let me be cautious in my thinking. I I say that because I'm leading people at the building level too to help them implement a policy and at the same time it is the first year of this policy and this board has
some ideas or thoughts especially after some of the conversations we've had at MSBA other school districts. It's not that I don't want to value the ideas or the thoughts of the school board when it comes to implementing the policy the building level. I want to give you the transparentness of this is what I know
has happened at the building level in terms of the conversation that this didn't just come out of principal's office that it actually was a broader conversation. >> Okay. >> Um yeah, I was going to make a point kind of to Emily's point about you know what's in the handbook as far
as first offense, second offense, third offense. That's not in our policy. So it is more fluid can be changed if need be. I think one of the overall concerns is it's a lot easier to go from more intrusive to less intrusive than to go
the other way around. So if we before this is even attempted to be implemented in the building this coming year if we want to be more lenient in some of the first offense second offense penalties that may not be the right way to go because you don't want to have to backtrack then six weeks into the school
year because you're you're going to you're going to lose some of the buy in. I I think and I've had teacher feedback frankly in the last couple weeks that if anything needs to be moved once the kids start to get used to this policy it's that you'd want it to move toward
leniency rather than toward being stricter. So I would hope and I I know the teachers I talked to hope to get the best start possible to the school year. Um, it requires consistent um enforcement of the policy and I think
what they've come up with is probably what they see as the best way of getting to that point where everybody is right, you know, essentially following the policy without the need for much oversight after however long it takes,
which I mean is consistent with the feedback we've gotten from the other districts that have implemented this. They say the first few weeks, first few months, whatever it may be, are the most challenging and then things settle down from there. So I yeah I So for that reason I would be
I guess against the idea of making what the teacher building leadership group came up with more lenient even before we try to implement this. I would stick with what they put together. Um would be my suggestion as one board member.
Um anybody else have comment on that? Um I was going to ask Dr. hard and maybe you don't know this, maybe this was only talked about at the building leadership level, but um I was going to ask whether
other alternatives to storing it in the vehicle or a locker or backpack were discussed. And where I'm going with this is kind of just a sense of the practicality of what's being asked. So, in the handbook, it says
devices should be left at home in a vehicle or powered off in a locker or backpack. Um, some of the same teachers I've talked to lately are concerned. And frankly, these these are the teachers that had the pouch system in their room, which not every teacher did. But the
ones that did have told me, look, at any given time, especially if I'm giving a test or letting a kid go to the bathroom, I cannot actually look at the device and know it's not on them. Um, and here we're kind of requiring that
they be kept out of sight, which is concerning to some degree to the teachers I talked to that now they're out of sight of me during a test. and I maybe they tell me it's at home, but that's only one of a few options that you know some of their options they're allowed to keep it with them in a
backpack. Um, so I was wondering if there was any discussion of that, any pros and cons of, you know, just leaving them out of the building entirely or requiring them to be shown to be turned off or putting them in a designated place
either for the entire day so that they're out of the kids's possession, that sort of thing. if you could share any of the discussion or the rationale for for >> sure and I probably won't give us a synopsis of >> Can we actually finish the prior conversation first? Sorry.
>> Oh, I thought we were >> I guess like I just went back and I was trying to listen to your points and I I went back and I looked at the middle school. So I looked at the middle school and then I looked at the high school. Currently, the first offense for having been found with a personal electronic
communication device on your person is a policy review of the student and staff member. The student then can pick up the from the office at the end of the day. Okay, seems fine. You go to the high school and it's item confiscated and given to office. Items are returned to the parent guardian. One hour of detention will be assigned in the
student to the student and the plan for a turn of device will be developed. Like to me, we already are going stricter with detention and a turn in plan. Why do we have to do the extra added parent pickup and you don't have to make a decision tonight? I just I would like
that this conversation is happening because like this was a policy that came from us and quite honestly I'm not even really that concerned about my own children. Like I know my kids are going to be fine. Like I'm not worried about having to go get a phone. Like that's not my concern here. But like I also
know that there's a lot of buildings that make mistakes and the first time you make a mistake is a great learning opportunity. And I don't know that it needs to be a parent's next opportunity to leave your phone at school for two days. Like you already learned, you didn't have your phone. Like go pick it
up. Like I just I want to be very like I want this to be firm. I want this to work. But I also don't think it needs to be at the detriment or at the embarrassment of our students. And I think that this honestly is that. And I think there way to be compromised. And
I'm not saying that we have to approve it tonight, but I would like that conversation brought back to the administration and the teachers that did formulate this so they can at least continue that conversation. And I guess my only thought on that just difference too between middle school and high school is developmental level. And
we talked about it so much so much during the the cell phone conversation about how at that developmental level at that age they are more responsible. they are able to handle the responsibility and the freedom of the cell phone better.
So in that instance, if that's the case, then they should be even more well aware of what's going to happen if you have a cell phone out knowing full well that you're not supposed to. So if you are more responsible, you are able to have more self-control and you still choose
to make that choice at that developmental level, then shouldn't the offense be equal to that to that you had a full understanding of what would happen and you chose to do it anyways? Middle school, you could still make the
argument that you are developmentally still learning. I've met a lot of eighth eighth and nth graders that act very similarly and 12th graders to nth graders that are very different. Like I just I mean I understand your point, but I do think that a ninth and a tth grader are very
different. And some of them I mean at the beginning of a school year when you go into sub in a sixth grade room, they still kind of act like fifth graders and they're still learning their space. And for me like giving them that space and that ability to do that is really important. And I just >> kids are going to make mistakes. I also
a huge concern about like are is this going to be to the point where teachers don't want to turn them in to the office because I'm assuming they're going to go to the office. I guess I shouldn't assume but they're going to go to the office like oh well you know I know Emily's a really good student. This had to have been just a mistake. Like I'm
just it back to her. Like I want to make sure that whatever it is that we're doing is going to be consistent. And I do have concerns that this won't be able to be consistent because it is so harsh. But this was with the recommendation from teachers as well as building
administration. Correct. >> Yes. >> So, and I don't know if it's because they think that the likelihood of an offense at all is lower because of the fear of the consequence potentially. I don't know. I wasn't there for the conversations. I'm just throwing that
out there as maybe a reason why a group of teachers may have had that opinion, but I'm not going to on that. my customer if you can just make sure that that is discussed. >> I think your point is going to be
probably one of maybe numerous points that we'll be working throughout the school year that wouldn't surprise having the background for me now knowing that teachers also voiced that this is what they're comfortable with.
I don't I'm fine with how it's written knowing that it's coming from them as well. >> Was any of the conversation included like with how well it has or hasn't been going at the middle school
>> like when they talk about this a little bit but not as much as so many of our high school teachers have to have that middle school experience of dayto day what's happening so I I do think there's the novelty of having to implement this new policy
in a society right now where cell phones are just so pronounced um I think they're looking at ways of how are we going to make this work that's much of the conversation leadership
and And note to to Matt's point maybe a little before a building leadership team is made up of 13 to 14 individuals that represents 80 to 90 individuals. So you're still going to have opinions within that teacher and instructional group that may even differ from what you
have in front of you this evening because those 18 or those 13 14 people are representing all 80 or 90 but they're not going to be able to represent. So will this piece, especially the offense,
like however the offenses are written, whether they stay or change at any point, are those going to be communicated out multiple times to families? >> Okay. And they'll be explicitly shared. Okay.
Um, any further discussion on the list of of offenses for misuse? No, just that I I do understand all sides of it and I think consistency between schools, but also that there's a difference between levels and with it
being new at the high school that there might understand the desire to want to come out with consequences that are desired to really enforce the
desired behavior. Yeah, it's >> that may kind of struggling with it because our current ninth and tth graders both lived at the middle school where this was in place >> and they knew that that was the best place and we can communicate. I mean I
don't know many eighth graders, nth graders and tth graders that are going to probably read the handbook. I'm sure that's not a shock to anybody at this table. So I do like I mean I will definitely be having a conversation with my own children. I hope all of our parents do that but just like the part is the part that really does worry me
because we have current nth and 10th graders that are used to the middle school policy. That's probably the expectation until they have a conversation with their mom and dad or their guardian. And I just that's where I'm >> what's the biggest concern? >> Um I think I think kids are going to
probably try and push, right? I mean that's what kids do >> and they're going to think that it's the consequence of the same and then they're going to find out real fast and it'll the sense of a parent who probably tried really hard to be like, "No, this is
what's going to happen." And I just I know how inconvenient that can be for we all do. And I I think you can get the same desired effect without having it to be a parent that picks it up that first time. I think detention and all those other things will do the same
have the same intended. They're not going to do it again. I I certainly wouldn't have wanted or have to have a device turn in plan that nobody else has. I mean, I I hear your concerns um especially
with the ninth and tth graders um with consistency from one school to the next. Tonight, the point I was about to make um was actually kind of along the same lines, but the opposite, which is we've got a junior and senior class who have whether it's middle school or high
school, not been under this policy. I think probably what I'm if I'm reading between the lines of what's been put forward here by the leadership team is that they need to be stricter to get quick buy in and compliance.
So, I can see both sides of that coin also. Any other comments or questions on that particular aspect? Um then Dr. to revert back to my question
which I can boil way down to what other possibilities maybe were discussed um if they were discussed about where the devices would be kept. >> I think after the discussion about yonder pouches and having the students
turn which would be incredible to the school district and I think neither the board or district administration was really necessarily looking to do along with the feedback that we heard school district that they weren't really that effective. Anyway, um the the challenge
became a looking at students turning in their phones possibly to their last lock class being a possibility, too. Um what some of the concerns that were brought up from both the leadership team and administration was is that to have that
would also maybe impact the when students would have to go retrieve their phone possibly from their fourth block class because they were leaving second block or third block that may impact instruction. So that was one of the concerns that was brought up.
I think what the hope was that we were going to be utilizing an opportunity for kids to maybe the right choice of having their phones off and maybe still on their person because that was some of the feedback we're hearing from the previous school district that we spoke
to probably the most at Still Water was that no matter what procedure you tried to put in place for kids turning in their phones, they either didn't turn in their phones or if they did sometimes they were turning phones or whatever you want to call them
and they still just so I think that was pretty much where they end up coming back to the phones are just going to have to be silenced and most likely we'll still probably >> unless we want to shake them down >> at the beginning of every school day right >> they can just say I don't have it and
are we going to you know >> I think we have a lot of students who leave unfortunately forunately on what perspective we take on that and that idea that they will be going into the fourth class you know very likely in fact especially the first five or six minutes of that
instructional period because they would be trying to get to that class and that teacher may have already started instruction >> well it's because it's not just PSO there's volunteers opportunities there's work programs so yeah >> I would think that those wouldn't be that hard because you just know that
that like the last test that they take in our building would be where they But it wouldn't necessarily be there, right? I mean, if you're leaving to go do those things, would you just plan accordingly? >> Certainly. But you you would be entering the classroom at the beginning of that
class. You have to be pretty prompt to make sure. >> Well, I guess I guess I'm thinking of it like if I am leaving from my third block to go to my PSO class, my phone would just be at my last class today. Or if I'm leaving early for tennis today,
>> I'm going to put it I know that I'm leaving at 2:10. Wherever I am at 2:10 in the building, that's where my phone will be put when I come in at the beginning of the day. >> How are we going to know though? Like, how are we going to know if they're doing it? You know what I mean? Like, >> I'm not saying that that's an ideal, but
like that is to me the workound or you have space in the office for them like today. I think as many opportunities, I don't want them to have to turn. I don't think that's realistic. I don't think they're going to do it. But giving them space
places that they can is going to be regardless. >> So Emily, your question >> sorry >> your question I think assumes that if they if the system was they turn it into their fourth block classroom somebody's going to keep track. I don't know if that was contemplated. >> Somebody would have
>> I mean if nobody's keeping track anyway then what Trisha says makes sense. >> And then what happens if they're keeping track and Johnny doesn't turn in his cell phone? Now who is responsible for hunting down Johnny? shaking down Johnny. Johnny says he doesn't have a cell phone. Show me your backpack. Show
me your pockets. It becomes this kind of unrealistic snowball at that point that >> I think you would >> Sorry. No, go ahead. >> I was just going to say I think you would just >> have the turnin not a not something you have to check up on. It's just here's
your last opportunity to get it off your person and put it somewhere where you know it is and you're not going to be tempted to use it. >> Yeah. >> Dr. your more recent comments, the words I heard loudest were get the kids to make the right choice. I I think what's lost
in a lot of this discussion and goes way beyond our board table with, you know, other communities too, is a lot of our discussion is so focused on the kids trying to sneak around this and what we really need is just an enforcement mechanism that gets the kids just to
understand just comply, do the right thing, make the right choice. And if that's if that's the message they keep hearing, not us trying to just outsmart them and them trying to outsmart us and trying to sneak around all the rules like, you know, the ultimate goal and maybe it's unrealistic, maybe it's
overly optimistic, but the ultimate goal should be focused on getting the kids themselves to make the right choice so that it's not such a burden >> so that it's habitual. >> Exactly. I would call the attention to all the board members that under first offense, second offense, and third offense the last statements and all the
local um that a plan will be devised for turning in will be developed that there's a concern that a student if a student comes and a student is really struggling with I just don't know what to do if I have it with me I just can't help myself putting words in children's mouth it's probably not fair but in each
of the first events there is an opportunity some opportunity might be more than just an opportunity might be a plan that a parent will agree to and it's not just an opportunity that will be developed where they are turning it into the office or they are turning it
into their life and that helps individualize something that I think Matt was referring back to that let's hope that this policy and the implementation of the procedure impacts 90% of kids in the way that we're all hoping for why the purpose of the policy
was for those 10% we're going to be working with them individually on their plans each of the offenses >> so And if we already have classrooms that have somewhere that they can put them if they so choose, are the other
classrooms that don't have something is there will there be some opportunity provided to them? >> So there will be plenty of opportunities for them to put their cell phone wherever they see fit. >> Okay.
And obviously they're not getting trouble when they put that back in their backpack or when they take it out of their backpack to put on that. >> But if there's going to be challenge for you as an individual to not want to go through your cell phone every time you turn in
>> I think we all recognize policy was brought forward because of the board of homes and All right. On the handbooks, any other discussion or suggested changes? Mary Lee, we all caught up.
>> Good. Thank you for keeping track. All right. If there's no further discussion, uh we have a motion to approve all of the handbooks. uh in one vote for the 2627 school year. All in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed?
And are approved unanimously. Uh action item number four, approval of the long-term facility maintenance expenditure application. Do we have a motion? >> So moved. Second. >> Motion by Jen, second by Trisha. And I'll welcome Jill Prom, director of
business services. Hello. Thank you for sticking it out. >> Yeah, I'll keep it brief. U this is uh something we do every year. It's really uh just refreshing. The long-term the LTFM application is required to be done
by July 30th every July 31st every year and submitted to the department of ed. Um it kickstarts the levy process for us. So they'll take um they'll take our data and use that to calculate what or implement what we're
able to levy for LTFM for fiscal year 28. So since we're in the beginning of fiscal year 27, the the levy that is ultimately approved in December of this year will include the long-term facilities maint. We're required to put a 10-year plan
together for that um that shows not only the revenue projection for each year, but also how we plan to spend the money into certain categories like roofing, electrical, plumbing, mechanical, those types of things. And that exercise is really just Jesse and I going through
and kind of projecting. Um a lot of what's in there placeholders. So we'll say we're gonna allocate $40,000 or whatever it is in the middle school for mechanical repairs, whatever that may be. So a lot of it is just
allocating placeholders for repairs that we don't necessarily know what they're going to be right now. Um but we just kind of hold those for the budget for future years. And then some of them are known items. um like last year when we did the middle school bleacher
replacement for example, that was a known item we knew we were going to have that spanned you know the end of one fiscal year on it. So um the larger items like that we make sure we know you know those are usually like within the next couple years when we know we're going to take that on we'll put them in kind
and it's an everchanging document. So, just because something um isn't included in that doesn't mean we can't do it, but we have to submit that um to the MDE every year to show you know that we've considered the revenue that we'll be getting and this is how we plan on
allocating that funding for the next 10 years. This is just our base revenue. So, the revenue allocation that we're looking at is only it's $380 per student and they're per pupil unit. So it's per weighted student and then that is um
prorated based on our average square footage building square footage age and right now our average age is 30 years our average square foot in the building is about 30 years yeah the different square footages of all the different additions and
buildings we've done over the years. So this application is just our first step in being allowed to levy that for next year and allowed to get the that right now it's about 60% state aid and 40% local. There are other elements to that that allow us to get more than our base
if we had if we approved a you know asbestous abatement program or a roofing program or indoor air quality or fire if we needed a new fire alarm or sprinkler system at a building or whatever and it was going to be over $100,000 in that building. We could identify that as a
project over $100,000 in that area. give MD detail about that and then we be allowed to capture more revenue on top of our base. But this 10-year plan doesn't include anything the size of there's no local tax impact about what
our normal allocation would be question. Keep it at keep it at the base level. >> Okay. >> Just grateful you understand all of this. >> Grateful for Jess.
>> Yes. Yes. >> We identify areas and we're thinking about those but our buildings are in great shape because it looks like >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Thank you, Joe. Um I am noticing the attachment is actually
for a resolution which we did not >> there is a resolution included um because we don't have may mostly because we don't have minutes available we won't have approved minutes before July 31st.
So if we approve this in a May or June meeting, then we would have approved minutes before July 31st from the meeting where it took place >> because it because we don't do that because because we're approving it in July, there is a resolution
um attached. So does that mean it's a roll call vote? Is that what you're wondering? >> I Well, I'm wondering if we need to change the motion to move for a resolution. >> Okay. >> Is that Yeah. Um, so the resolution is the only thing we need to approve, >> correct? >> Correct. >> So, okay. Do we have to amend
amendment? >> Move to resend your motion, please. >> I move to resend my motion to approve the long-term facility maintenance. >> Okay. Second. >> Second. >> Oh, were you second me for a second? Okay.
>> Motion by Jen, second by Matt, third by Chelsea. Yeah. >> Uh discussion is Yeah. I just intend somebody to now after we vote on rescending to move >> to have vote on. >> Yeah. So all in favor of resending.
>> I >> I All right. Any opposed on the resending. >> Okay. So the first motion is rescended. resolution adoption motion of the
28 facilities maint >> and >> second >> expenditure application >> expend >> all right motion by Trisha second by Jen any further discussion Emily please conduct a roll call vote
>> oh we are doing roll call okay I'm going to start with you >> Emily yay Matt Jen, >> yay. >> Chelsea, >> yay. >> Thank you. All right. >> Approves unanimously. Thank you. Uh,
action item five, approve superintendent Superintendent Revard's 2027 to 2030 contract. Is there a motion? >> Some motion. >> Second. >> Motion by Jen. Second by Emily. Um, discussion. I'll just introduce that Dr. Dr. Revard's current contract runs
through the end of this coming school year, June 30th of 2027. Um, as I mentioned earlier, Jen and I sat down with Dr. Revard at the beginning of July and negotiated uh a contract that would be
starting July 1, 2027, going through June 30th of 2030. Another three-year contract. Um, I appreciate Dr. regards patience with us, myself specifically on the day of negotiations. It was very much a learning experience.
We worked through a lot of uh things that were new to myself. Um but at the end of the day are presenting the board with contract the summary of which is included in your agenda materials and I believe Dr. Revard shared the full text of the contract with board members at
the end of last week. >> So unless there's any questions, >> do you have to read anything? Uh, nope. Not required to read anything out. Unless anybody wants me to cover any of the basics that are in the summary sheet.
>> Thank you for the work that you and Dr. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. All right. Uh, all in favor of approving the contract say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Hearing none. The contract is approved
unanimously. Discussion. Uh we have our second reading of policies 615, 625 and 630 which are uh basic standards testing is 615, class
size and people to staff ratio is 625 and video and media use is 630. Do we have any discussion on those policies? had a question. I feel like now granted I attended remotely last time but there was I could I couldn't remember what it
was and I could have rewatched sorry but >> didn't we change didn't I ask to have something changed >> and then if it was changed >> and which one >> oh >> it was the letter B
>> okay we have one more reading so if you want to just rewatch and if it is something we still have one more opportunity to make a change. >> Yeah, I'm assuming it got changed because I tried to look through and I couldn't find anything but changed that nightly. Well,
>> we can double check >> and you can just let me know. I'm not super concerned. you're talking. Thank you. Any other questions, discussion? Okay, hearing none, we'll go on to discussion item number two on the agenda, which is a second reading to
resend policies 422 and 630.1, which are uh 422 is policies incorporated by reference and 630.1 is the procedure for video media use. Any discussion?
>> No, I think you had teachers having to submit a document. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Any further discussion? All right, we'll move on to our last discussion item, which is our monthly talk about the three takeaways from the
meeting. Uh, members of the board, my recommendation at this point would be looking at action items 2, three, and four. Approval of employee handbooks, approval of school handbooks, and approval of long-term facilities maint.
>> Is there any appetite to say that we're renewing? >> Yeah, that's right. I was going to say that seems like three more years. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> These are the board's three takeway. >> I don't think the community I hear add number five. Which of the
other three would you anticipate? >> No. No. I think the other two or five. >> No, I I had two, three, and four. >> He's saying of employee handbook, school handbooks, and LTFM. Which one are we taking out? >> LTFM. >> Okay. >> Sorry, Joe.
>> So, number three is now approval. >> Oh, he agrees. >> I just remember the community. >> This is an annual. So for the board it'll be action item two and five take. >> Yeah.
>> Great. >> You two okay with that? >> 2 three and five being the three takeaways action items two three and five. >> I mean part of me feels like you could say we approved all the handbooks >> combine the two handbooks into one.
>> Okay. But I also wondered if we wanted I know that we've already talked about cell phone policy but is there a way to word it that the procedure is now available in >> an updated procedure is now >> yes >> I do think that that's a very important
part of what we talked about just so I'm clear where we at So, what we're looking at is item two and three combined being combined. We get to keep those number four for long-term facilities expenditure application. And
then number five, call that one out too, but ensuring in the language of the three takeaways because we do write one or two, three, excuse me, two or three sentences per takeaway. We'll ensure that there's a link to the cell phone langage within the handbooks. We spent
so much of this evening talking. >> Great. Everybody good? >> Thank you. >> Upcoming meetings. Uh think I mentioned this one earlier. Policy committee Thursday, August 6th here at the district service center at
4:30 followed by our work session August 6th here at the district service center at 6 p.m. not 6:30. board meeting Monday, August 17th, uh here at the district service center, also at 6 PM. Thank you for that. Um I'm
sure I won't get any text messages that day. Uh city district ad hoc committee meeting that's also here Thursday, August 20th at 1 p.m. I believe that one lasts about two hours. Uh facilities committee is here Tuesday,
August 25th at 3 p.m. That one usually lasts one hour. We have a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> Finally, Scott's in there. >> Motion by Jen, second by Scott. >> That might be a takeaway.
>> Any any discussion? >> Hearing? None. All in favor of adjourning say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Matt for Trisha asking you to >> since we were